World events and the “failure of the international community” as stated by DIMA has created a situation in which people will pay large amounts of money and put their lives at risk in order to seek safety and security in Australia and other countries. QPASTT also acknowledges that the Australian government must develop strategies to deal with large numbers of unauthorised arrivals and to neglect to do so will in fact severely threaten the current refugee and humanitarian program.
To date these strategies have included work with the international community and other refugee receiving countries. In addition there has been a wide scale information campaign in the countries through which the unauthorised arrivals will pass on their way to Australia. Another strategy has been to create in Australia a level of “in-hospitability” that will serve as a deterrent, and will in effect “dry up” the market. That is, to implement certain conditions and restrictions such that no person, however desperate, would chose Australia voluntarily. It is this last strategy to which this paper will be addressed primarily.
Australia’s refugee and humanitarian program should be set at reasonable limits but should be sufficiently flexible to respond to the exigencies of the world wide refugee crisis. Clearly Australia must now “push the envelope” when setting limits to the refugee and humanitarian program. We cannot enjoy the luxury of simply taking refugees on our systematic terms – who we want, when we want. We have now to join the chaos of the reality of many other countries who deal with refugee intakes chaotically imposed. A radical increase in numbers is warranted.
Similarly services in Australia need to be mindful of the world wide refugee crisis. They need to work constructively towards supporting a refugee and humanitarian intake that reflects global needs. An increase in the refugee intake that is comprised only by unauthorised arrivals is neither equitable nor intelligent.
Strategies which promote social disunity are harmful to the whole Australian community.
The Offshore program should be quarantined at a minimum of 10,000 with priorities set by the usual processes. The current practice of counting TPVs as part of the 12,000 refugee and humanitarian places (10,000 Offshore and 2,000 Onshore) will create a level of inter and intra-community animosity which could severely harm Australia’s enviable reputation for successful refugee resettlement. Already, Middle Eastern communities have been informed that TPV numbers will be taken from the allocation for the Middle East refugee and humanitarian program.
Other refugee communities similarly have been told that TPV numbers will threaten the refugee intake generally, and that this will impact on their sponsorship applications. Setting one part of the community against the other can only be destructive on multiple levels individual, family, community, and agency.
The Offshore program and the Onshore program should not be linked, but treated separately. Those entrants brought to Australia as a country of resettlement should not be subject to the vagaries of the size of the “unauthorised entrant” program. While the practice of “people trafficking” is abhorrent and the perpetrators should be dealt with, punishing those who have been “trafficked” is not fair or humane.
For TPV entrants the denial of services and the right to bring family to Australia constitutes deprivation and punishment. Inhumane treatment of entrants in Australian detention is also punishment. Denying TPV entrants the right to bring family may in the end simply encourage those people to bring family with them in the first place. The effect would be to increase rather than decrease the rate of unauthorised arrivals. The policy environment should reflect a compassionate and humane response to those who have already survived refugee trauma.
TPV entrants have been acknowledged as having valid refugee claims. It is therefore important that the Australian response is humane and constructive. The policy that suggests in effect: “you are allowed here but you will not be allowed to be comfortable” serves no purpose. It is important to acknowledge the past traumas of refugees and seek to provide those services which will best enable each individual the opportunity to rebuild their lives with dignity.
If TPV entrants develop for themselves an identity as pariah figures, there is a risk of alienation worsening. Instead of community self-sufficiency we may see more evidence of crime, begging, gambling, substance abuse, psychotic breakdown and anti social behaviour. There is already ample evidence of this with asylum seekers (Silove and Steel).
The Department of Immigration, Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs (DIMIA) should be adequately resourced to be able to deliver high quality decisions quickly. The current practice is for DIMIA to reject most claims for refugee status, giving the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) a processing rather than review function, causing huge delays and clogging the system. In our experience there is no reason why so many claims have had to be decided by the RRT when, in theory, DIMIA has the power to make a prima facie decision. This situation primarily concerns asylum seekers at this point; however the TPV entrants are also subject to the DIMIA application process and is it only humane to ensure that that process is of adequate quality and timely.
Agencies and individuals involved with this group at all levels should seek to counteract the climate of fear and panic perpetuated by media reports. TPV entrants have been referred to as “illegals” and “boat people” and their arrivals as a “flood” or” waves”, creating the impression Australians will be swamped. This emotive reporting fans hysteria, inflames panic and prohibits a calm and thoughtful approach to the difficult issue. These entrants have their own stories to tell. In order for the Australian community to respond effectively to the situation (which is not of the entrant’s making), we need to develop the habit of understanding the complexity of issues.
Note: Please visit the website of the Refugee Council of Australia for related material at:
www.refugeecouncil.org.au
^Back to Top | 
